網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

the time Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans, when human bodies were meat for fowls and beasts, parents ate their children, and they buried in Tophet or Gehenna, till there was no place. 3. The early disciples were Jews, and must have understood Gehenna in the sense of the prophets. 4. No explanation was ever given by our Lord, to show, that he used it differently from the prophets; and if he did he must have misled his hearers, 4. The Jews, when threatened with the danination of Gehenna, are told, in the same discourse, that it shall come on that generation. 6. What the Saviour, Matth. x. 23, represents by Gehenna, he expresses in verse 33, by the phrase losing the life. 7. In the same chapter he declares, that the time (verse 23) should be before the disciples had gone over the cities of Israel, or when the Son of man should come, thus showing, that he referred to the destruction of Jerusalem.8. In every case where the disciples are warned of Gehenna, they are told that their whole bodies should be destroyed. Now why was this, if a spiritual punishment were intended? 9. The word Gehenna is found only twelve times in the New Testament, once addressed to Jews, twice in a sense which none consider to teach endless woe, and the rest of the times, it is addressed to the disciples. It was not however nine times addressed to them: probably not more than five times, for the Evangelists all recorded the same discourse. Therefore, either Christ preached too little about hell, or Ministers now preach too much. 10. The Jewish sects of our Lord's day, did not

[ocr errors]

represent future punishment by the emblem of fire; and as this is the sense in which Gehenna is always used in the Targums and christian writers, it could not have been used by our Lord to represent future woe. 11. John, who wrote his gospel for the Gentiles, never mentions Gehenna. 12. Paul, Peter and Luke, are also silent respecting it. Why was this, if it represented future torment?

Here sir, are twelve facts which have never yet been answered. Most of them are contained in my fourth letter; but you have found it convenient to give them no reply.— Doubtless such will be the case in this instance; but as they are an array, quite as formidable as your twelve commentators, I must hold them up for consideration.

You say when our Lord threatened the wicked with the punishment of Gehenna, he added as an equivalent expression to deepen the impression on the mind, "into the fire that never shall be quenched, where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." In reply to this, I will observe,

1. Christ never addressed this language to the wicked, but to his disciples. He only once threatened sinners with the punishment of Gehenna; and in that case, he added nothing respecting the fire and worm. How will you reconcile this with the idea, that an endless hell was intended? And how different is this from the present popular method of preaching hell-fire! Now, it is preached altogether to sinners; but then whatever was intended by it, was addressed to the disciples. 2. The adding of the phrases, "where their

worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched," is an argument against your application of the text, rather than in its favour. This is evident because, Isaiah (LXVI. 24) represents the destruction of the Jews under the same figures; and our Lord using it in Mark Ix. 1s the strongest proof that could be given, of his having reference to the same event. Isaiah's prediction was literally fulfilled, at the destruction of Jerusalem; and as the Saviour uses the same language, and alludes to the body, like the prophet, he without doubt refers to the same destruction. As therefore our Lord's language had no reference to futurity, the fire of which he speaks can no more be endless, than theone of which the prophet speaks, for "there is nothing to feed it." Hence we see, that the phrases under consideration, are as you admit, equivalent to Gehenna, and that both are applied by inspired prophets, to the destruction of Jerusalem. Thus, therefore, our Saviour used them.

5. Concerning the two texts, which you have placed in juxtaposition, I will remark, 1. Luke says nothing of casting the spirit into hell; and in all the places which speak of Gehenna, nothing is said of punishing the spirit, but the body is mentioned. Thus Luke says, fear him who after he hath killed the body, hath power to cast (the body) into Gehenna. So Matthew says, destroy both soul (life) and body in Gehenna. 2. Gehenna had long been a place where the filth of Jerusalem was deposited, where criminals were executed, and where dead bodies were permitted to lie unburied. This explains our Lord's

language, cast the body into Gehenna, destroy the body in Gehenna: that is, leave it unburied, exposed to beasts, birds and worms, where the worm did not die and the fire was not quenched. This men could not do, for sympathy and respect for the dead would prevent it; public sentiment would not allow so shameless a violation of common feeling. But in the terrible judgment which God was about to bring upon that people, they would be destroyed soul (life) and body in Gehenna.After they were killed, they would be cast into Gehenna. Such, according to Josephus, was the case with thousands; for in the siege of Jerusalem, the living and dead were thrown into Gehenna, where they remained a prey to fire, worms and beasts. Viewed in this light, the mention of casting the body into Gehenna, and of destroying it there, showed the terrible nature of the impending judgment. 3. In the two chapters of Matthew and Luke, from which the texts you have placed in juxtaposition are taken, it is expressly said, that those should lose their lives, that did not follow Christ, while those should save their lives, that did follow him; and to impress this more deeply upon the mind, Jesus reminds them of his coming to destroy Jerusalem, when punishment would be inflicted on his enemies. 4. Gehenna was the figure to represent this punishment. This I have quite fully illustrated in my fourth letter. 5. The same word rendered life in Matth. chap. x. 39, (lose his life) is the one rendered life in Matth. x. 28, and Luke XII. 4, 5. Now as both refer to the same event, it is evident that the (psuche)

life or soul is the same in both. The opnion of Parkhurst will not answer as a reply to this.

For these reasons I must say, that it is clear as noon-day to me, that in the texts under consideration, our Lord had no reference to the future world. And as all the passages where Gehenna occurs are silent respecting punishing the spirit, I do think you must yield the point.

5. Your remarks on apokteino (kill) require but a passing notice. My criticism is met by a sneer and denounced as a gloss. I am told too that Parkhurst, Grove and Bass, are against me. But such is not the case. Parkhurst says that apokteino is used figuratively; and refers to Rom. vII. 11; 2 Cor. III. 6, as instances. The Lexicons of Grove and Bass I have not before me, but Donnegan, who is certainly as good authority, says, it means, "to torture, torment, render miserable or wretched." In justification of this definition, let us observe, 1. That when it is said, God is able to destroy soul and body, a different word (apolesai not apokteino) is used. This word signifies death in all the following places: Matth. II. 13; XVIII. 20; Mark x1. 18; John x. 10; Mark Iv. 38. It is a general word for death and the destruction of a thing. See Matth. IX. 17; Heb. 1. 11. Now why was this different word used, if apokteino here signified to put to death? 2. Apollesas is the word used to express the loss of life, in a verse (39) following the one (Matth. x. 28) which says, God is able to destroy soul and body. This shows, that what is meant by losing the life, in verse

« 上一頁繼續 »